FCC’s Wireless Plan: Martin Wants Net Porn-Free
Outgoing FCC Chair Kevin Martin will try to push through his plan for free wireless internet (via Silicon Alley Insider) before the year ends. . . with a big caveat.
The free Internet plan is the most controversial issue the agency will tackle in December. . . .
The proposal to allow a no-smut, free wireless Internet service is part of a proposal to auction off a chunk of airwaves. The winning bidder would be required to set aside a quarter of the airwaves for a free Internet service. The winner could establish a paid service that would have a fast wireless Internet connection. The free service could be slower and would be required to filter out pornography and other material not suitable for children. The FCC’s proposal mirrors a plan offered by M2Z Networks Inc., a start-up backed by Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers partner John Doerr.
Much of the wireless industry objects to the plan on its face—it does require them to give something away, after all, even if it will be an inferior product. “Consumer advocates” (as the WSJ calls them) object to the pornography filter.
I certainly object to any porn filter—it’s a basic First Amendment conflict. Plus, these filters have proven to be blunt instruments that don’t account for ambiguities of content or malicious third-party attachments. But I also have other concerns:
What does “slower” mean? Would this free product be so inferior as to be practically useless? Would “slower” allow for sponsored content to get pushed through the pipe at faster speeds (something service providers have lobbied for on the wired net)?
Who gets to program the filter? Would the responsibility be completely outsourced to this company that conveniently has a plan just like Martin’s that’s about ready to go? Or, no better, would the question of what constitutes smut be up to some branch of the federal government?
And, who profits? It sure looks like the FCC plan is designed to benefit M2Z Networks. I don’t know much about their connections, but you can’t help but notice that they feature a quote from Kevin Martin at the very top of their home page (it cycles through other quotes from the likes of FCC Commissioners Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein, and Sen. Daniel Inouye, as well as still-President George W. Bush).
It should also be noted that the quotes provided to buttress their “online child safety” filter come from Republican Senators Sam Brownback and Orin Hatch—just the men I want deciding what is and isn’t indecent. . . uh, no.
Backer John Doerr sits on the boards of many of the boldfaced names of the net (Google, Amazon, Intuit, Sun), and tends to support Democrats and high-profile causes that most would consider liberal (e.g. The Alliance for Climate Protection, Grameen). Last month, Doerr offered some advice to the president-elect, including kick-starting new energy research, encouraging foreign-born engineering students to stay in the US, and restoring DARPA to “its former glory and autonomy.”
Missing from the reportage and likely missing from Martin’s considerations, too, is that the airways belong to the public, and are granted to private service providers for a fee so that they might serve the public interest. I, for one, am not interested in the pay-for-freedom model the FCC is proffering.
Related posts:
Social Web